Toxic wrote:
On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 13:58:09 -0800, Bob Dobbs wrote:

dave wrote:
At what price of efficiency and speed?
snipped the rest of the diversion

Efficiency and speed weren't part of the original caveat.

You know Dobbs, the attempt to dodge your challenge to his concerns about
MS security reminds of an old adage: When strolling in the woods and you
come across a quail dragging a wing, you know two things - there's
nothing wrong with the wing and you're getting too close to the nest.
IOW: maybe he's had difficulty trying to secure a doze box in the past
and blames it all on the OS.
BTW: I agree that with a bit of gumption you can indeed secure windows.

I've never had a problem with security on Windows boxes. That's not the
point. Just the fact that Windows stayed stuck on the single desktop
for so long should tell you something.

The Windows world is like a red light district, heavy on panhandlers.